The Voynich Ninja

Full Version: The quest for Anchiton
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
(01-03-2020, 01:03 AM)DONJCH Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Although this is interesting, I am wondering what is the use of an isolated gate in the wilderness unless it is defended by a garrison?

In versions which I'm yet to refer to, Alexander comes to two mountains and makes a prayer to God to bring those mountains close to each other so that he could build a gate between them. It would have been more rational to ask God to just merge the mountains to shut the pass altogether, but... true kings are not looking for royal roads!

But it's not "wilderness". People live there (with whom Alexander has talks and some business), it's the realm of a certain Persian king Tubarlak (as he's called in the Christian Legend), and in the Discourse Alexander even fights the army of this Tubarlak (here called Tubarliki) and 62 other kings, and he kills the latter and captures the former alive.

But yes, that's an interesting point. Instead of a gate he could made an impenetrable wall which would serve the purpose. That's what he does in the Quran, indeed.

Anderson, after Noeldeke, considers the Christian Legend the principal source of the story of Dhu 'l-Qarnayn (the "Two-Horned One") in Surah 18 of the Quran. Dhu 'l-Qarnayn is generally regarded to represent Alexander, although some researchers are of differing opinion, e.g. they think he's King Darius or someone else. The respective passage (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by Abdel Haleem) is conveniently copy-pasted:

Quote:[Prophet], they ask you about Dhu ’l-Qarnayn. Say, ‘I will tell you something about him.’ We established his power in the land, and gave him the means to achieve everything. He travelled on a certain road; then, when he came to the setting of the sun, he found it [seemed to be] setting into a muddy spring. Nearby he found some people and We said, ‘Dhu ’l-Qarnayn, you may choose [which of them] to punish or show kindness to.’ He answered, ‘We shall punish those who have done evil, and when they are returned to their Lord He will punish them [even more] severely, while those who believed and did good deeds will have the best of rewards: we shall command them to do what is easy for them.’ He travelled on; then, when he came to the rising of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had provided no shelter from it. And so it was: We knew all about him. He travelled on; then, when he reached a place between two mountain barriers, he found beside them a people who could barely understand him. They said, ‘Dhu ’l-Qarnayn, Gog and Magog are ruining this land. Will you build a barrier between them and us if we pay you a tribute?’ He answered, ‘The power my Lord has given me is better than any tribute, but if you lend me your strength, I will put up a fortification between you and them: bring me lumps of iron!’ and then, when he had filled the gap between the two mountainsides [he said], ‘Work your bellows!’ and then, when he had made it glow like fire, he said, ‘Bring me molten metal to pour over it!’ Their enemies could not scale the barrier, nor could they pierce it, and he said, ‘This is a mercy from my Lord. But when my Lord’s promise is fulfilled, He will raze this barrier to the ground: my Lord’s promise always comes true.

Interestingly, Anderson uses the classical 18th century You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by Sale, in which 18:91 is translated as "And he prosecuted his journey from south to north", whereas in the modern translation quoted above it is simply "he travelled on". Anderson does not take note that "from south to north" is printed in italics meaning that this phrase is inserted by the translator. Sale provides an explanatory footnote as to why he decided to introduce particulars, but anyway it's not said in the Quran that Alexander-Dhu ’l-Qarnayn traveled from south to north, it's just Sale's speculation. But Anderson takes it at face value and concludes that the "gate" (or, as we see, literally a barrier), instead of being built in its due place of the pass of Dariel, is built in extreme north-east, since Alexander first traveled to the region where the sun rises (meaning some extreme east), and then from that point he (as Anderson believes based on Sale's dubious manner of translation) traveled to the north (which, in the real Quran, he did not do). This false interpretation Anderson then carries forward to the later two chapters of his book where he discusses the location shift of the gate exhibited as the legend develops through centuries.

Another misconception about the gate in the Quran is in the You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. by van Donzel and Schmidt, where they say (p. 21) that in Quran the motif is found whereby on Alexander's request, the mountains are moved towards each other. As we just saw, this is not true. That's a bit strange, given that they dedicate a whole chapter 3 to this story in the Quran.

Anderson also provides a quote from ibn Thabit, a contemporary of Muhammad, translation by Nicholson. I post it here as well, because I like it:

Quote:Ours the realm of Dhu ’l-Qarnayn the glorious,
Realm like his was never won by mortal king.
Followed he the sun to view its setting
When it sank into the sombre ocean spring;

Up he clomb to see it rise at morning,
From within its mansion when the East it fired;
All day long the horizons led him onward.
All night through he watched the stars and never tired.

Then of iron and of liquid metal
He prepared a rampart not to be o’erpassed,
Gog and Magog there he threw in prison
Till on Judgement Day they shall awake at last.

In Quran, the barrier is built of iron and "molten metal"; van Donzel and Schmidt also quote (p.87) the Tafsir by al Qummi, the 10th century commenter on Quran, according to whom the gate (literally the gate) was made of copper, iron, pitch and tar.

Next we move to the major group of sources, the so-called pseudo-Callisthenes, where at last some innovative substance appears. I will post about that later.
It is to be noted that another liberty that Sale takes with the Quran is that he explicitly inserts "Gog and Magog" into 18:96, - I guess, based on later commenters, - where the book says simply "their enemies". To this Sale adds a footnote:

Quote:The commentators say the wall was built in this manner. They dug till they found water, and having laid the foundation of stone and melted brass, they built the super-structure of large pieces of iron, between which they laid wood and coals, till they equalled the height of the mountains; and then setting fire to the combustibles, by the help of large bellows, they made the iron red hot, and over it poured melted brass, which filling up the vacancies between the pieces of iron, rendered the whole work as firm as a rock. Some tell us that the whole was built of stones joined by cramps of iron, on which they poured melted brass to fasten them
I spent a few hours hunting for “anchiton”, following You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. From De Goeje, I got to Israel Levi’s article about “Historia de Preliis”, in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. He mentions and partially transcribes a few manuscripts.

I finally found anchiton in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (Italy, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., 14th Century) f.17v, left column, 4-5 lines above the capital D (it is split on two lines as anchi-ton). It also occurs on the previous line as “ansichiton”, and somebody added a small “si” above “anchiton”. One more line above (7th above D) there’s “portas”.
Here is a transcription of the passage based on Levi’s:

Tunc continuo deprecatus est deum Alexander impensius exaudivitque eius deprecationes. Et precepit deus duobus montibus quibus est vocabulum promunctorium boreum, et adjuncti sunt ad invicem usque cubitos XII. Et statim construxit portas heneas et circumfudit eas ansichiton [Levi: antichiton] quod a ferro non corrumpitur nec ab igne solvitur. Talis enim est natura anchiton quod ferrum confranget in comminationem ignemque ut aqua extinguit. Et nullus prevalet ad eos intrare nec illi ullo modo exinde exire. 

Machine Translation (I checked it and it’s OK). [Alexander has just seen how scary Eastern people are] Then Alexander at once earnestly prayed to God, and God heard his prayer. And God commanded two mountains, which are called the Northern Promontories, and they drew together until they were only twelve cubits apart. And immediately he constructed bronze gates and coated them with ansichiton [Levi: antichiton], which cannot be corroded by iron nor melted by fire. For such is the nature of anchiton, that it shatters iron as if by pressure and quenches fire as water does. And no one is able to enter through them, nor can those within in any way come out.

Several more manuscripts are listed on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. It would be interesting to check more of them…

[attachment=11028]
Might it be a typo due to unfamiliarity with the word combined with the line break?
The origin of the word certainly is due to unfamiliarity with Greek (not by the author of the Latin original, Leo of Naples, but by later copyists). I also checked a few manuscripts of Glossa Ordinaria (from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) but could find no occurrence of "anchiton", still the fact that it occurs in early printed editions seems significant. I wonder if the word passed from (copies of) the Historia to (copies of) the Glossa, or the other way round, or it's a case of coincidental parallel corruption (this sounds unlikely, but who knows...)
To re-up the notion that "anchiton" is a corrupted version of "amianthon," I wanted to point out this medical manual, published in 1547 in Venice, refers to "amianthon" as one of several Greek terms used to describe callitrichi/callitrichon, aka the aquatic plants known today as water-starworts. Given the magical, spell-like appearance of the writing on f116v, I find the "remarkably fire-resistant wood-like material" reading a bit more plausible, but even so, here you go: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

I also know there are earlier "anchiton" sightings here, but I wanted to point out that "anchiton" appears in a 1495 Venetian printing of the Glossa Ordinaria: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
For what it's worth, looking for "incombusta permanere..." in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., that stores OCR'd copies of "recent" (19th and 20th c.) editions, I found:

1. Adamus Scotus, De tripartito tabernaculo (1212): DE TRIPARTITO TABERNACULO PARS PRIMA. DE TABERNACULO MOYSIS IN SENSU LITTERALI. , CAPUT XXII. , L. (date of publication: 1855)
amyton

2. Beda, De tabernaculo et vestibus sacerdotum (735): LIBER SECUNDUS. , CAPUT XI. (date of publication: 1850)
amianton

3. Rabanus Maurus, Commentaria in Exodum (856): LIBER TERTIUS. , CAPUT XVI. (date of publication: 1851)
amianton

No anchiton before Nicolas de Lyra (13-14th c.), apparently, but it's hard to tell for sure when/where it appeared for the first time.

Modern French has the word "amiante" (presumably derived from amianton) previously "asbeste", meaning asbestos. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I believe the anchiton/amianton explanation is on the first page of this thread.

Anchtion ola dabat, maybe asbestos pot gave...?
(19-07-2025, 05:54 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I also checked a few manuscripts of Glossa Ordinaria (from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) but could find no occurrence of "anchiton",
There is an entry of anchiton here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., it refers to col. 773 but the page is missing.
A copy with the col. 773 without the anchiton entry: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(20-07-2025, 01:30 PM)Juan_Sali Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(19-07-2025, 05:54 PM)MarcoP Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I also checked a few manuscripts of Glossa Ordinaria (from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) but could find no occurrence of "anchiton",
There is an entry of anchiton here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., it refers to col. 773 but the page is missing.
A copy with the col. 773 without the anchiton entry: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.


You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., "anchiton" appeared in the earliest printed edition of Glossa Ordinaria (1480-81, Strasbourg). It was then copied again and again in later printed editions. It would be interesting to find occurrences in manuscripts from the same time as, or earlier than, the Voynich MS.

[attachment=11048]
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8